No place called home

Tanzania's desire to reduce its refugee population could mean an unwanted return home for thousands of Burundians who fled a civil war characterised by appalling human rights abuses

The dust left from a convoy of 23 trucks and buses ferrying 1,200 refugees to the UNHCRrun Nyarugusu camp after the Tanzanian government decided to shut down the camp of Luguf. Photography by: Peter Marlow

In the Mtabila refugee camp Daphrose Hakizimana, a 36-year-old widow and mother of three, is faced with an uncertain future. Daphrose has been a refugee in Tanzania since fleeing Burundi at the outbreak of civil war in 1993. Now the camp she lives in is set to close, leaving her little option but to make the 30-mile journey back to her home country.

For Daphrose the prospect is daunting. "I have no desire to go back to Burundi. My whole family were killed there before my eyes."

The 15-year conflict between warring Hutu and Tutsi factions was characterised by appalling human rights abuses. Although Daphrose managed to escape being murdered she was raped on her way into exile and only years later discovered she had contracted HIV. "It is hard for me to even think about the place," she says.

As well as these concerns, Daphrose has compelling reasons to stay in Tanzania. Several years ago her husband was violently killed, and although officials have acknowledged his death she is still fighting for a proper investigation to take place.

Daphrose's resistance to returning to Burundi is typical of many of the camp's 36,000 inhabitants, yet recent developments suggest that the decision to send them home has already been made regardless. For the duration of the civil war, Burundians were granted automatic asylum in Tanzania. However on 30 September the Tanzanian government sent a delegation to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Geneva to request that this right be revoked due to "much improved circumstances" in Burundi. If successful, this will almost certainly lead to the closure of the Kigoma region's Mtabila camp, and mark the end of a process that has caused many to doubt the government's commitment to the rights of refugees and the ability of the UNHCR to intervene when these are breached.

For decades, Tanzania has hosted refugees from neighbouring countries in the volatile Great Lakes region, but recently the government has made no secret of its desire to remove its refugee populations, particularly those from Burundi, where hostilities formally ceased in 2008. Five years ago there were more than 400,000 Burundians living in 12 camps dotted across the plains of west Tanzania, but today only 36,000 remain in a single camp. The decision of so many refugees to return home has been attributed to the success of the Burundian peace process, but the voluntary nature of these returns has been questioned by observers who accuse the government of deliberately eroding the remaining refugees' quality of life in order to indirectly force them to return.

Until recently, inhabitants of Mtabila camp had access to a broad range of services but, as the government's attitude hardened, the refugees have been subjected to massive restrictions, despite the presence of the UNHCR. The once-busy market has been closed and the income-generating activities used to occupy people's time have stopped. The schools have also closed, depriving thousands of children of an education. To worsen matters no one is allowed to leave the camp without a special permit and in this closed environment cases of family breakdown, alcoholism and violence against women have become alarmingly high, with seven reported cases of rape in a single month.

But, despite the hardships and the imminent threat of camp closure, the number of returnees has recently decreased dramatically. About 6,000 refugees left Tanzania during the first six months of 2009, whereas during the first week of September only one person in Mtabila returned to Burundi. Many insist that, despite the peace process, they will still face persecution in Burundi, where the perpetrators of the worst acts of violence remain unpunished and next year's elections hold the possibility of renewed conflict. But the Tanzanian government is adamant the issue is simple: "It is very straightforward," says a government official, "if the situation [that made the refugees flee] comes to an end, and we believe that it has, then they have to go back to their country of origin."

But the truth is anything but simple. Tanzania's eagerness to close the Mtabila camp is the result of wide-ranging political concerns. Refugees in Tanzania have long been unpopular with the local community, who see them as a burden and source of instability. Tanzanian politicians have responded by promising a "refugee-free zone" in time for next year's general election. In addition, Tanzania and Burundi are both part of the East African Federation, an ambitious political union seeking the resolution of refugee situations in order to distance the region from the remnants of its volatile past.

Accessing justice

This is of little relevance to women such as Daphrose who, according to international law, have the right to have their cases individually heard. But the UNHCR, traditionally responsible for ensuring adherence to international law, is compromised by conflict between its humanitarian mandate and political dynamics on the ground. "It is a struggle," admits June Munala, a UNHCR protection officer. "We are doing all we can to convince the government that they have obligations. But they are tired. They have been hosting refugees since 1957 and feel they have done their duty."

In response to the government's tough stance, the UNHCR has reverted to a negotiating role, fearful that if pushed too hard the government could resort to drastic measures, such as in 1996 when the military were used to evict thousands of Rwandan refugees. Instead of fighting for their right to remain, the UNHCR are encouraging a dignified exit for refugees in Mtabila camp by offering generous incentive packages for those returning voluntarily. "It's a process balancing the politics and our obligations," says Munala.

The situation begs urgent questions of how rights can be accessed by refugees, and many in the Mtabila camp are taking proactive measures to fight for the voice currently being denied them. As camp closure looms, hopes rest on a grassroots legal movement made up of volunteer refugees and trained by the only NGO operating in the camp independent of the UNHCR. Since June, the Women's Legal Aid Centre, funded by One World Action, has been working in Mtabila camp training dozens of refugee volunteers in legal rights so that they can advocate on behalf of peers who, after years of being stateless and voiceless, are unfamiliar with the notion of holding authorities to account. Their strategy is radically different from traditional models, but the co-ordinator of the camp's paralegals, Tharcisse Ngeziminwe, sees it as simple: "All our work is rooted on laws and rights that are nationally and internationally recognised. All we are doing is bringing these rights into people's homes."

For the past three months the volunteers have been visiting the homes of refugees and organising meetings to ensure that people - especially women - are aware of their rights and know the first steps to take in case they need help. For women like Daphrose, the paralegals have already been a great help. "Life is hard in the camp because we aren't treated like individuals. But they have given me a great deal of support; they listen to individual cases like mine." The team of 37 volunteers has already had success at breaking down the obstacles to accessing justice for women in the camps, against whom frequent acts of violence are traditionally trivialised by officials. Whether they will be able to ensure that refugees can voice their individual concerns regarding repatriation is another matter, but their method of individual advocacy seems the likeliest hope.

The political momentum behind a speedy resolution to the Burundian refugee situation seems unstoppable, and the forced return of refugees will get few headlines. Yet their fate should be significant to anyone who associates the presence of aid agencies and the UN with the protection of refugees, who as stateless people too frequently find themselves collectively subjected to the discretion of governments.